Tag: Grand

  • Judge denies media access to records in Mar-a-Lago grand jury fight

    Judge denies media access to records in Mar-a-Lago grand jury fight

    [ad_1]

    In her latest six-page ruling, Howell said revealing any of the records publicly would invade grand jury secrecy.

    “Responding to petitioners’ request would be infeasible without disclosing grand jury material because, if the government asked to hold the former president in contempt, as petitioners allege, that request would have been part of an effort to secure compliance with the grand jury Subpoena,” wrote Howell, taking care not to confirm any details of the battle. “The requested filings would invariably and consistently touch on ‘matters occurring before the grand jury.’”

    Howell noted news reports about prosecutors’ efforts to seek contempt proceedings over allegedly inadequate efforts by Trump lawyers to locate documents with classification markings related to the ongoing probe headed by special counsel Jack Smith.

    Last month, Howell denied a similar access request from POLITICO and The New York Times for information about privilege battles relating to prosecutors’ efforts to call former White House aides before a grand jury investigating attempts to interfere with the certification of the 2020 presidential election.

    But last month, Howell also opted to unseal several significant filings in a grand jury matter connected to Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.), a key ally in Trump’s effort to overturn the 2020 election. Howell said the grand jury materials in that case could be released in part because the court of appeals held public arguments about the matter that revealed details that had previously been public.

    Howell, an appointee of President Barack Obama, is set to end her seven-year term as chief judge next week. Grand jury-related matters not resolved by then are expected to be transferred to her successor, U.S. District Court Judge James Boasberg, also an Obama appointee.

    [ad_2]
    #Judge #denies #media #access #records #MaraLago #grand #jury #fight
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Trump invited to testify before NY grand jury, lawyer says

    Trump invited to testify before NY grand jury, lawyer says

    [ad_1]

    election 2024 cpac 83393

    “It’s just another example of them weaponizing the justice system against him. And it’s sort of unfair,” he said.

    The office of Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, a Democrat, declined to comment. Such an invitation to testify before a grand jury often indicates a decision on indictments is near.

    The invitation to testify was first reported by The New York Times.

    Any indictment would come as Trump is ramping up a run to regain the White House in 2024 while simultaneously battling legal problems on multiple fronts.

    Trump, in a lengthy statement posted on his social media network, blasted the investigation as a “political Witch-Hunt trying to take down the leading candidate, by far, in the Republican Party” and what he called a “corrupt, depraved, and weaponized justice system.”

    “I did absolutely nothing wrong,” he said.

    Meanwhile, the district attorney in Atlanta, Ga., has said decisions are “imminent” in a two-year investigation into possible illegal meddling in the 2020 election by Trump and his allies. A U.S. Justice Department special counsel is also investigating efforts by Trump and his allies to undo the election as well as the handling of classified documents at his Florida estate.

    The New York grand jury has been probing Trump’s involvement in a $130,000 payment made in 2016 to the porn star Stormy Daniels to keep her from going public about a sexual encounter she said she had with the Republican years earlier.

    The money was paid out of the personal funds of Trump’s now-estranged lawyer, Michael Cohen, who then said he was reimbursed by the Trump Organization and also paid extra bonuses for a total that eventually rose to $420,000.

    Cohen pleaded guilty to federal charges in 2018 that the payment, and another he helped arrange to the model Karen McDougal through the parent company of the National Enquirer tabloid, amounted to an illegal campaign contribution.

    Federal prosecutors at the time decided not to bring charges against Trump, who by then was president. The Manhattan district attorneys office then launched its own investigation, which lingered for several years but has been gathering momentum in recent weeks.

    Several figures close to Trump have been spotted in recent days entering Bragg’s office for meetings with prosecutors, including his former political adviser Kellyanne Conway and former spokesperson Hope Hicks.

    Cohen has also met several times with prosecutors, saying after a recent visit that he thought the investigation was nearing a conclusion.

    Under New York law, people who appear before a grand jury are given immunity from prosecution for things they say during their testimony, so potential targets of criminal investigations are generally invited to testify only if they waive that immunity. Lawyers generally advise clients not to do so if there is a potential for a criminal case.

    It isn’t clear what charges prosecutors might be exploring.

    Legal experts have said one potential crime could be the way the payments to Cohen were structured and falsely classified internally as being for a legal retainer. New York has a law against falsifying business records, but it is a misdemeanor unless the records fudging is done in conjunction with a more serious felony crime.

    Tacopina said there was no crime.

    “There’s no precedent for this. There’s no established case law on this campaign finance stuff. It’s ridiculous. And there’s no underlying crime,” he said.

    Separately, the district attorney’s office has also spent years investigating whether Trump and his company inflated the value of some its assets in dealings with lenders and potential business partners. Those allegations are the subject of a civil lawsuit, filed by the state’s attorney general.

    [ad_2]
    #Trump #invited #testify #grand #jury #lawyer
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Saudi plies over 9K EVs for Umrah pilgrims, Grand Mosque visitors

    Saudi plies over 9K EVs for Umrah pilgrims, Grand Mosque visitors

    [ad_1]

    Riyadh: The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) has provided more than 9,000 electric vehicles (EV) for Umrah pilgrims and visitors to the Grand Mosque in Makkah, the Saudi Press Agency (SPA) reported.

    The General Presidency for the Affairs of the Grand Holy Mosque and the Prophet’s Holy Mosque has provided electric vehicles (EVs) round the clock for elderly and disabled Umrah performers and pilgrims.

    The move helps them to perform the needed rituals with ease.

    More than 9,000 electric vehicles are at the service of visitors to the Grand Mosque and can be pre-booked through the Tanaqol (transport), which aims to serve pilgrims and Umrah performers through the latest technological developments.

    The application helps in the purchase of tickets and pre-booking of electric vehicles and reduces overcrowding at points of sale and delivery.

    Subscribe us on The Siasat Daily - Google News

    [ad_2]
    #Saudi #plies #EVs #Umrah #pilgrims #Grand #Mosque #visitors

    ( With inputs from www.siasat.com )

  • BJP, Grand Alliance to demonstrate political strength in Bihar today

    BJP, Grand Alliance to demonstrate political strength in Bihar today

    [ad_1]

    New Delhi: The Bharatiya Janta Party (BJP) and the Grand Alliance are all set to demonstrate their political strength in Bihar on Saturday.

    Union Home Minister Amit Shah is arriving in Bihar today on a day-long visit.

    During his visit, Shah will address a public meeting in Lauria under Valmiki Nagar Lok Sabha Constituency in Bihar to strengthen the party activities.

    On the other hand, the Grand Alliance is preparing to answer Union Home Minister Amit Shah through a mega rally in Purnia where Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar, Deputy Chief Minister Tejashwi Yadav, Congress State President Akhilesh Prasad Singh, and other leaders of Grand Alliance are likely to be present.

    Shah will address a public rally in the Valmiki Nagar Lok Sabha seat. He will then chair the Core Committee meeting of Valmiki Nagar Lok Sabha seat. State BJP President Sanjay Jaiswal, Union Minister for State Home Affairs Nityanand Rai, senior BJP leaders of Valmiki Nagar Lok Sabha, local MP, MLAs, and district BJP president to be present in the meeting.

    Home Minister Amit Shah will then go to Lauria Nandangarh, where Prince Siddhartha (Mahatma Buddha) shed his royal robes and went out searching for knowledge.

    After that Union Home Minister will head towards the capital Patna to address a Kisan Mazdoor Samagam at Bapu Sabhagar in honour of Swami Sahjanand Saraswati, who was one of the top farmer leaders in the country.

    While talking to ANI, Minister of State for Home Affairs Nityanand Rai who is at Lauria for Shah’s program said, “There is tremendous enthusiasm among people for today’s public meeting of Home Minister Amit Shah ji. A large number of people want to listen to the Home Minister. The welfare work that is being done in the entire country under the leadership of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, the people of Valmiki Nagar are enthusiastic about it and want to listen to Home Minister Amit Shah.”

    On the Grand Alliance Rally in Purnia on the same day when Union Home Minister Amit Shah is visiting Bihar for Public Meeting, Rai said, “It is not right to compare BJP’s public meeting with Grand Alliance’s rally. The public meeting of the BJP will be held with the resolution of Sabka Saath, Sabka Vikas, Sabka Vishwas, and Sabka Prayas. The rally of the Grand Alliance is a rally of appeasement. Grand Alliance is holding a rally in Purnia today to give the message of appeasement politics. There is no comparison between that rally and this BJP public meeting. BJP’s program is just a program for one Lok Sabha seat.”

    “There is no answer to the name and work of PM Modi. The result of his work is visible in every house, and every village in the Country. The public meeting of Valmiki Nagar will be massive. The Home Minister will speak about development. He will talk about peace and security while the Grand Alliance rally is a rally of appeasement,” Rai added.

    On being asked if the Grand Alliance is holding a rally in Bihar on the same day to give a political message to Union Home Minister Amit Shah, Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) MP Manoj Kumar Jha said, “You have to first find out whose rally was first decided. Our rally was already fixed. The Home Minister is going to participate in a small rally, ours is a mega rally. This is a big difference. Amit Shah ji is the Home Minister of the country, he is free to go anywhere, but he is coming to Bihar. He has to answer two questions and one is special. After the Prime Minister spoke about the special state status of Bihar we will expect the Home Minister to speak on this issue and Bihar should get its right.”

    “My second question is that the Home Minister is the Home Minister of the country so he should make efforts so that his statement increases the social harmony of the country and not decrease it. I am sure that he will accept my request,” the RJD MP added.

    Meanwhile, Rashtriya Lok Janta Dal chief spokesperson Madhaw Anand, while speaking to ANI about the Grand Alliance rally at Purnia, said, “The rally is to divert the attention of the people from the infighting going on between RJD and JDU. Through this rally, there will be neither progress of the public nor any welfare of the people. Just the fight going on inside RJD and JDU for CM’s chair will intensify in the coming days.”

    “Through this rally, both RJD and JDU are trying to test their strength internally. It will be interesting to see how long Nitish Kumar can retain his chair and how long Tejashwi Yadav can distance himself from the magic chair,” Anand added.

    Notably, this would be Amit Shah’s fourth trip to Bihar since the BJP and Janata Dal (U) ended their partnership and the JD(U) formed the Grand Alliance in the state last year in the month of August.

    [ad_2]
    #BJP #Grand #Alliance #demonstrate #political #strength #Bihar #today

    ( With inputs from www.siasat.com )

  • Judge won’t unseal details of Trump’s privilege fight over Jan. 6 grand jury

    Judge won’t unseal details of Trump’s privilege fight over Jan. 6 grand jury

    [ad_1]

    POLITICO and The New York Times had both petitioned Howell to unseal portions of the grand jury proceedings in October, citing the historic nature of the secret rulings she had issued. The Justice Department opposed the unsealing, prompting Howell’s decision.

    “The continued secrecy of certain details about that investigation is required for the sake of grand jury witnesses and the government’s investigation,” Howell wrote.

    Both POLITICO and The Times indicated they were considering whether to appeal.

    “POLITICO is committed to the principle that a government of, for and by the people is transparent with the people on such an important matter,” company spokesperson Brad Dayspring said. “We are reviewing the decision and evaluating next steps.”

    A spokesperson for The Times, Danielle Rhoades Ha, said: “We are disappointed in the ruling. We will make a decision about whether to pursue further legal steps once we’ve had time to process the opinion that sets forth the rationale for the decision.”

    In recent months, aides to former Vice President Mike Pence have appeared at the courthouse to testify behind closed doors after Howell rejected an effort by Trump to claim privilege over their testimony. Other top Trump allies have been seen heading into the federal courthouse’s sealed grand jury rooms — including former White House Counsel Pat Cipollone and his onetime deputy Pat Philbin.

    Press reports, typically attributed to people familiar with the proceedings, have also detailed a series of fights over legal privilege issues and a bid by Trump to assert executive privilege to keep some aides from testifying.

    One grand jury-related dispute, involving an objection by Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.) to prosecutors’ seizure of his cellphone last year in an election-related probe, was argued before the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals on Thursday in a session held partly in public and partly in secret. POLITICO revealed the details of that grand jury fight ahead of the appeals panel’s decision to partially unseal the arguments.

    Howell seemed to evince discomfort about aspects of her latest ruling, particularly what she termed the “ironic” result that because cases of significant interest to the public often draw extensive news coverage and speculation about grand jury activities, the governing legal standards can require courts to withhold information in such cases even though court rulings on grand jury subpoenas in routine cases are often released with the names of those involved blacked out.

    Redaction would be ineffective in the current dispute, the chief judge said, because it would simply be too easy for those reading the opinions or filings to infer the identities of those involved in the litigation.

    “Redacting information in those materials would not sufficiently uphold that secrecy because matters occurring before the grand jury are so deeply intertwined with non-secret information would prove useless, or worse, misleading,” the chief judge wrote.

    Howell, who will hand over the chief judge’s post and decision-making authority in grand jury matters to a colleague next month, also dinged the Justice Department for failing to address how Attorney General Merrick Garland’s public announcement in November of the appointment of special counsel Jack Smith might have undercut the justification for secrecy in the ongoing probe.

    “When asked to address the impact of this DOJ announcement on grand jury secrecy in the instant applications … the government simply ignored this portion of the Order and chose not to respond to the fact of the Special Counsel’s appointment,” Howell wrote.

    Howell used her 32-page opinion to throw considerable shade at a 2019 decision in which the D.C. Circuit overruled her and held that judges lack discretion to release grand jury materials for reasons not specifically enumerated in a federal court rule governing disclosures. In that ruling, the appeals court said historical interest was not a sufficient basis for a judge to make grand jury-related information public.

    Howell pointed to what she portrayed as a series of oversights in the appeals court’s decision, even as she acknowledged that it binds her legally.

    The Supreme Court declined to review the D.C. Circuit ruling, leaving it as the established law for federal grand juries in Washington.

    However, then-Justice Stephen Breyer issued a statement noting that three other federal appeals courts had found more flexibility for judges to release grand jury-related records. Calling it an “important question,” Breyer urged a federal panel overseeing court rules to dive into the issue and determine whether changes to the policy are appropriate.

    [ad_2]
    #Judge #wont #unseal #details #Trumps #privilege #fight #Jan #grand #jury
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Inside the deal: How Boris Johnson’s departure paved the way for a grand Brexit bargain

    Inside the deal: How Boris Johnson’s departure paved the way for a grand Brexit bargain

    [ad_1]

    Press play to listen to this article

    Voiced by artificial intelligence.

    LONDON — It was clear when Boris Johnson was forced from Downing Street that British politics had changed forever.

    But few could have predicted that less than six months later, all angry talk of a cross-Channel trade war would be a distant memory, with Britain and the EU striking a remarkable compromise deal over post-Brexit trade rules in Northern Ireland.

    Private conversations with more than a dozen U.K. and EU officials, politicians and diplomats reveal how the Brexit world changed completely after Johnson’s departure — and how an “unholy trinity” of little-known civil servants, ensconced in a gloomy basement in Brussels, would mastermind a seismic shift in Britain’s relationship with the Continent.

    They were aided by an unlikely sequence of political events in Westminster — not least an improbable change of mood under the combative Liz Truss; and then the jaw-dropping rise to power of the ultra-pragmatic Rishi Sunak. Even the amiable figure of U.K. Foreign Secretary James Cleverly would play his part, glad-handing his way around Europe and smoothing over cracks that had grown ever-wider since 2016.

    As Sunak’s Conservative MPs pore over the detail of his historic agreement with Brussels — and await the all-important verdict of the Democratic Unionist Party of Northern Ireland — POLITICO has reconstructed the dramatic six-month shift in Britain’s approach that brought us to the brink of the Brexit deal we see today.

    Bye-bye Boris

    Johnson’s departure from Downing Street, on September 6, triggered an immediate mood shift in London toward the EU — and some much-needed optimism within the bloc about future cross-Channel relations.

    For key figures in EU capitals, Johnson would always be the untrustworthy figure who signed the protocol agreement only to disown it months afterward.

    In Paris, relations were especially poisonous, amid reports of Johnson calling the French “turds”; endless spats with the Elysée over post-Brexit fishing rights, sausages and cross-Channel migrants; and Britain’s role in the AUKUS security partnership, which meant the loss of a multi-billion submarine contract for France. Paris’ willingness to engage with Johnson was limited in the extreme.

    Truss, despite her own verbal spats with French President Emmanuel Macron — and her famously direct approach to diplomacy — was viewed in a different light. Her success at building close rapport with negotiating partners had worked for her as trade secretary, and once she became prime minister, she wanted to move beyond bilateral squabbles and focus on global challenges, including migration, energy and the war in Ukraine.

    “Boris had become ‘Mr. Brexit,’” one former U.K. government adviser said. “He was the one the EU associated with the protocol, and obviously [Truss] didn’t come with the same baggage. She had covered the brief, but she didn’t have the same history. As prime minister, Liz wanted to use her personal relationships to move things on — but that wasn’t the same as a shift in the underlying substance.”

    Indeed, Truss was still clear on the need to pass the controversial Northern Ireland Protocol Bill, which would have given U.K. ministers powers to overrule part of the protocol unilaterally, in order to ensure leverage in the talks with the European Commission.

    Truss also triggered formal dispute proceedings against Brussels for blocking Britain’s access to the EU’s Horizon Europe research program. And her government maintained Johnson’s refusal to implement checks on goods entering Northern Ireland from Great Britain, causing deep irritation in Brussels.

    But despite the noisy backdrop, tentative contact with Brussels quietly resumed in September, with officials on both sides trying to rebuild trust. Truss, however, soon became “very disillusioned by the lack of pragmatism from the EU,” one of her former aides said.

    “The negotiations were always about political will, not technical substance — and for whatever reason, the political will to compromise from the Commission was never there when Liz, [ex-negotiator David] Frost, Boris were leading things,” they said.

    GettyImages 1244099952
    Former British Prime Minister Liz Truss announces her resignation outside 10 Downing Street in central London on October 20, 2022 | Daniel Leal/AFP via Getty Images

    Truss, of course, would not be leading things for long. An extraordinary meltdown of the financial markets precipitated her own resignation in late October, after just six weeks in office. Political instability in Westminster once again threatened to derail progress.

    But Sunak’s arrival in No. 10 Downing Street — amid warnings of a looming U.K. recession — gave new impetus to the talks. An EU official said the mood music improved further, and that discussions with London became “much more constructive” as a result.

    David Lidington, a former deputy to ex-PM Theresa May who played a key role in previous Brexit negotiations, describes Sunak as a “globalist” rather than an “ultra-nationalist,” who believes Britain ought to have “a sensible, friendly and grown-up relationship” with Brussels outside the EU.

    During his time as chancellor, Sunak was seen as a moderating influence on his fellow Brexiteer Cabinet colleagues, several of whom seemed happy to rush gung-ho toward a trade war with the EU.

    “Rishi has always thought of the protocol row as a nuisance, an issue he wanted to get dealt with,” the former government adviser first quoted said.

    One British official suggested the new prime minister’s reputation for pragmatism gave the U.K. negotiating team “an opportunity to start again.”

    Sunak’s slow decision-making and painstaking attention to detail — the subject of much criticism in Whitehall — proved useful in calming EU jitters about the new regime, they added.

    “When he came in, it wasn’t just the calming down of the markets. It was everyone across Europe and in the U.S. thinking ‘OK, they’re done going through their crazy stage,’” the same official said. “It’s the time he takes with everything, the general steadiness.”

    EU leaders “have watched him closely, they listened to what he said, and they have been prepared to trust him and see how things go,” Lidington noted.

    Global backdrop

    As months of chaos gave way to calm in London, the West was undergoing a seismic reorganization.

    Russia’s large-scale invasion of Ukraine triggered a flurry of coordinated work for EU and U.K. diplomats — including sanctions, military aid, reconstruction talks and anti-inflation packages. A sense began to emerge that it was in both sides’ common interest to get the Northern Ireland protocol row out of the way.

    “The war in Ukraine has completely changed the context over the last year,” an EU diplomat said.

    A second U.K. official agreed. “Suddenly we realized that the 2 percent of the EU border we’d been arguing about was nothing compared to the massive border on the other side of the EU, which Putin was threatening,” they said. “And suddenly there wasn’t any electoral benefit to keeping this row over Brexit going — either for us or for governments across the EU.”

    A quick glance at the electoral calendar made it clear 2023 offered the last opportunity to reach a deal in the near future, with elections looming for both the U.K. and EU parliaments the following year — effectively putting any talks on ice.

    “Rishi Sunak would have certainly been advised by his officials that come 2024, the EU is not going to be wanting to take any new significant initiatives,” Lidington said. “And we will be in election mode.”

    The upcoming 25th anniversary of the Belfast/Good Friday peace agreement on April 10 heaped further pressure on the U.K. negotiators, amid interest from U.S. President Joe Biden in visiting Europe to mark the occasion.

    “The anniversary was definitely playing on people’s minds,” the first U.K. official said. “Does [Sunak] really want to be the prime minister when there’s no government in Northern Ireland on the anniversary of the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement?”

    The pressure was ramped up further when Biden specifically raised the protocol in a meeting with Truss at the U.N. General Assembly in New York in late September, after which British officials said they expected the 25th anniversary to act as a “key decision point” on the dispute.

    The King and I

    Whitehall faced further pressure from another unlikely source — King Charles III, who was immediately planning a state visit to Paris within weeks of ascending the throne in September 2022. Truss had suggested delaying the visit until the protocol row was resolved, according to two European diplomats.

    The monarch is now expected to visit Paris and Berlin at the end of March — and although his role is strictly apolitical, few doubt he is taking a keen interest in proceedings. He has raised the protocol in recent conversations with European diplomats, showing a close engagement with the detail. 

    One former senior diplomat involved in several of the king’s visits said that Charles has long held “a private interest in Ireland, and has wanted to see if there was an appropriately helpful role he could play in improving relations [with the U.K].”

    By calling the deal the Windsor framework and presenting it at a press conference in front of Windsor Castle, one of the king’s residences, No. 10 lent Monday’s proceedings an unmistakable royal flavor.

    The king also welcomed von der Leyen for tea at the castle following the signing of the deal. A Commission spokesperson insisted their meeting was “separate” from the protocol discussion talks. Tory MPs were skeptical.

    Cleverly does it

    The British politician tasked with improving relations with Brussels was Foreign Secretary Cleverly, appointed by Truss last September. He immediately began exploring ways to rebuild trust with Commission Vice-President and Brexit point-man Maroš Šefčovič, the second U.K. official cited said.

    His first hurdle was a perception in Brussels that the British team had sabotaged previous talks by leaking key details to U.K. newspapers and hardline Tory Brexiteers for domestic political gain. As a result, U.K. officials made a conscious effort to keep negotiations tightly sealed, a No. 10 official said.

    “The relationship with Maroš improved massively when we agreed not to carry out a running commentary” on the content of the discussions, the second U.K. official added.

    This meant keeping key government ministers out of the loop, including Northern Ireland Minister Steve Baker, an arch-Brexiteer who had been brought back onto the frontbench by Truss.

    GettyImages 1247215337
    British Foreign Secretary James Cleverly is welcomed by European Commission Vice-President Maroš Šefčovič ahead of a meeting at the EU headquarters in Brussels on February 17, 2023 | Kenzo Tribouillard/AFP via Getty Images

    The first U.K. official said Baker would have “felt the pain,” as he had little to offer his erstwhile backbench colleagues looking for guidance while negotiations progressed, “and that was a choice by No. 10.”

    Cleverly and Šefčovič “spent longer than people think just trying to build rapport,” the second U.K. official said, with Cleverly explaining the difficulties the protocol was raising in Northern Ireland and Šefčovič insistent that key economic sectors were in fact benefiting from the arrangement.

    Cleverly also worked at the bilateral relationship with German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock, while Sunak made efforts to improve ties with French President Emmanuel Macron, Lidington noted.

    A British diplomat based in Washington said Cleverly had provided “a breath of fresh air” after the “somewhat stiff” manner of his predecessors, Truss and the abrasive Dominic Raab.

    By the Conservative party conference in early October, the general mood among EU diplomats in attendance was one of expectation. And the Birmingham jamboree did not disappoint.

    Sorry is the hardest word

    Baker, who had once described himself as a “Brexit hard man,” stunned Dublin by formally apologizing to the people of Ireland for his past comments, just days before technical talks between the Commission and the U.K. government were due to resume.

    “I caused a great deal of inconvenience and pain and difficulty,” he said. “Some of our actions were not very respectful of Ireland’s legitimate interests. I want to put that right.”

    The apology was keenly welcomed in Dublin, where Micheál Martin, the Irish prime minister at the time, called it “honest and very, very helpful.”

    Irish diplomats based in the U.K. met Baker and other prominent figures from the European Research Group of Tory Euroskeptics at the party conference, where Baker spoke privately of his “humility” and his “resolve” to address the issues, a senior Irish diplomat said.

    “Resolve was the keyword,” the envoy said. “If Steve Baker had the resolve to work for a transformation of relationships between Ireland and the U.K., then we thought — there were tough talks to be had — but a sustainable deal was now a possibility.”

    There were other signs of rapprochement. Just a few hours after Baker’s earth-shattering apology, Truss confirmed her attendance at the inaugural meeting in Prague of the European Political Community, a new forum proposed by Macron open to both EU and non-EU countries.

    Sunak at the wheel

    The momentum snowballed under Sunak, who decided within weeks of becoming PM to halt the passage of the Northern Ireland Protocol Bill in the House of Lords, reiterating Britain’s preference for a negotiated settlement. In exchange, the Commission froze a host of infringement proceedings taking aim at the way the U.K. was handling the protocol. This created space for talks to proceed in a more cordial environment.

    An EU-U.K. agreement in early January allowed Brussels to start using a live information system detailing goods moving from Great Britain to Northern Ireland, seen as key to unlocking a wider agreement on physical checks under the protocol.

    The U.K. also agreed to conduct winter technical negotiations in Brussels, rather than alternating rounds between the EU capital and London, as was the case when Frost served as Britain’s chief negotiator.

    Trust continued to build. Suddenly the Commission was open to U.K. solutions such as the “Stormont brake,” a clause giving the Northern Ireland Assembly power of veto over key protocol machinations, which British officials did not believe Brussels would accept when they first pitched them.

    The Stormont brake was discussed “relatively early on,” a third U.K. official said. “Then we spent a huge amount of effort making sure nobody knew about it. It was kept the most secret of secret things.”

    Yet a second EU diplomat claimed the ideas in the deal were not groundbreaking and could have been struck “years ago” if Britain had a prime minister with enough political will to solve the dispute. “None of the solutions that have been found now is revolutionary,” they said.

    An ally of Johnson described the claim he was a block on progress as “total nonsense.”

    The ‘unholy trinity’

    Away from the media focus, a group of seasoned U.K. officials began to engage with their EU counterparts in earnest. But there was one (not so) new player in town.

    Tim Barrow, a former U.K. permanent representative to the EU armed with a peerless contact book, had been an active figure in rebuilding relations with the bloc since Truss appointed him national security adviser. He acquired a more prominent role in the protocol talks after Sunak dispatched him to Brussels in January 2023, hoping EU figures would see him as “almost one of them,” another adviser to Sunak said.  

    Ensconced in the EU capital, Barrow and his U.K. team of negotiators took over several meeting rooms in the basement of the U.K. embassy, while staffers were ordered to keep quiet about their presence.

    Besides his work on Northern Ireland trade, Barrow began to appear in meetings with EU representatives about other key issues creating friction in the EU-U.K. relationship, including discussions on migration alongside U.K. Home Secretary Suella Braverman.

    Barrow “positioned himself very well,” the first EU diplomat quoted above said. “He’s very close to the prime minister — everybody in Brussels and London knows he’s got his ear. He’s very knowledgeable while very political.”

    But other British officials insist Barrow’s presence was not central to driving through the deal. “He has been a figure, but not the only figure,” the U.K. adviser quoted above said. “It’s been a lot of people, actually, over quite a period of time.”

    When it came to the tough, detailed technical negotiations, the burden fell on the shoulders of Mark Davies — the head of the U.K. taskforce praised for his mastery of the protocol detail — and senior civil servant and former director of the Northern Ireland Office, Brendan Threlfall.

    The three formed an “unholy trinity,” as described by the first U.K. official, with each one bringing something to the table.

    Davies was “a classic civil servant, an unsung hero,” the official said, while Threlfall “has good connections, good understanding” and “Tim has met all the EU interlocutors over the years.”

    Sitting across the table, the EU team was led by Richard Szostak, a Londoner born to Polish parents and a determined Commission official with a great CV and an affinity for martial arts. His connection to von der Leyen was her deputy head of cabinet until recently, Stéphanie Riso, a former member of Brussels’ Brexit negotiating team who developed a reputation for competence on both sides of the debate. 

    Other senior figures at the U.K. Cabinet Office played key roles, including Cabinet Secretary Simon Case and senior official Sue Gray.

    The latter — a legendary Whitehall enforcer who adjudicated over Johnson’s “Partygate” scandal — has a longstanding connection to Northern Ireland, famously taking a career break in the late 1980s to run a pub in Newry, where she has family links. More recently, she spent two years overseeing the finance ministry.

    Gray has been spotted in Stormont at crunch points over the past six months as Northern Ireland grapples with the pain of the continued absence of an executive.

    Some predict Gray could yet play a further role, in courting the Democratic Unionist Party as the agreement moves forward in the weeks ahead.

    For U.K. and EU officials, the agreement struck with Brussels represented months of hard work — but for Sunak and his Cabinet colleagues, the hardest yards may yet lie ahead.

    This story was updated to clarify two parts of the sourcing.



    [ad_2]
    #deal #Boris #Johnsons #departure #paved #grand #Brexit #bargain
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.eu )

  • Witnesses in Trump investigation may have lied, says Georgia grand jury report

    Witnesses in Trump investigation may have lied, says Georgia grand jury report

    [ad_1]

    Multiple witnesses who testified before a special purpose grand jury investigating Donald Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election may have lied and committed perjury, according to a section of the grand jury’s report released on Thursday.

    The report offers the first insight into the work of the special purpose grand jury, which was convened in May last year. The 23 jurors and three alternates heard from 75 witnesses during the course of its investigation.

    The Georgia case, led by the Fulton county district attorney, Fani Willis, is believed to be one of the most likely scenarios in which the former president, and some of his allies, could face charges for efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 US election.

    “A majority of the Grand Jury believes that perjury may have been committed by one or more witnesses testifying before it. The Grand Jury recommends that the District Attorney seek appropriate indictments for such crimes where the evidence is compelling,” the grand jurors wrote. The sections released on Thursday do not name the witnesses or provide any other details.

    A judge also released the introduction and conclusion to the report, neither of which provide substantive insight into whether Trump or allies will face criminal charges. The judge has declined to release the full report until Willis decides whether to bring charges.

    The introduction details the special grand jury’s process and says it ultimately unanimously concluded “no widespread fraud took place in the Georgia 2020 presidential election that could result in overturning that election”. It also says the grand jurors heard “extensive testimony on the subject of alleged election fraud from poll workers, investigators, technical experts, and State of Georgia employees and officials, as well as from persons still claiming that such fraud took place”.

    The conclusion acknowledges that Willis, the prosecutor, has discretion to seek charges outside of what the grand jury recommends.

    “If this report fails to include any potential violations of referenced statutes that were shown in the investigation, we acknowledge the discretion of the District Attorney to seek indictments where she finds sufficient cause,” the report says. “Furthermore this Grand Jury contained no election law experts or criminal lawyers. The majority of this Grand Jury used their collective best efforts, however, to attend every session, listen to every witness, and attempt to understand the facts as presented and the laws as explained.”

    The work of the special purpose grand jury is being closely watched because it ultimately could lead to the first criminal charges against Trump for his actions after the 2020 election. A special purpose grand jury is convened for an indefinite amount of time and can subpoena witnesses, but not issue indictments.

    The investigation is meant to determine whether Donald Trump and allies violated Georgia state law in their efforts to overturn the 2020 election. Trump infamously called the Georgia secretary of state, Brad Raffensperger, and requested that he “find” votes in his favor. “I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more that we have because we won the state,” he said in a January 2021 phone call.

    Rudy Giuliani, Trump’s lawyer, has also been informed he is a target of the investigation. Sixteen people who served as fake electors from Georgia are also reportedly targets of the investigation.

    The decision over whether to bring charges is ultimately up to Willis, a Democrat in her first term as the Fulton county district attorney. Willis said at a court hearing last month that a decision on whether to bring charges was “imminent”.

    Trump and allies could face a range of criminal charges under Georgia law. It is a crime in Georgia to solicit someone to commit election fraud or to interfere with the performance of official election duties. Willis could also bring charges under the state’s Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (Rico) Act to charge Trump’s confidantes with crimes as part of a broader conspiracy to overturn the election. Willis hired a lawyer who specializes in Rico to assist her with the investigation.

    [ad_2]
    #Witnesses #Trump #investigation #lied #Georgia #grand #jury #report
    ( With inputs from : www.theguardian.com )

  • Judge releases part of Georgia grand jury report on alleged 2020 election tampering

    Judge releases part of Georgia grand jury report on alleged 2020 election tampering

    [ad_1]

    geiorgia election investigation 99003

    The bulk of the report, including recommendations about potential criminal charges for Trump and his allies, remains under seal.

    Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis, who opposed release of any portion of the report at this time, said during a court hearing about three weeks ago that her decisions about potential prosecutions were “imminent.” She has not provided a further update.

    Trump has denounced the investigation as a political vendetta.

    “The long awaited important sections of the Georgia report, which do not even mention President Trump’s name, have nothing to do with the President because President Trump did absolutely nothing wrong,” a spokesperson for the former president said Thursday.

    The report underscores the extensive investigation that Willis undertook, noting that the panel heard from 75 witnesses, as well as investigators who helped them comb through voluminous documents related to the probe.

    The partial release also makes clear that many grand jurors believe that some of the testimony they heard from witnesses subpoenaed to discuss election-related issues and incidents was false.

    “A majority of the grand jury believes that perjury may have been committed by one or more witnesses testifying before it,” the report says. “ The Grand Jury recommends that the district attorney seek appropriate indictments for such crimes where the evidence is compelling.”

    Willis has spent the last year investigating Trump and his allies’ bid to reverse the election results in Georgia, despite losing the state by 11,000 votes. Willis’ probe focused on Trump’s Jan. 2 phone call to Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, asking him to “find” just enough votes to put Trump ahead of Joe Biden in the state.

    Raffensperger declined the request and told Trump that investigators found his claims of fraud to be baseless.

    The Trump spokesperson on Thursday defended that call as “perfect” and stressed that there were “many officials and attorneys on the line, including the Secretary of State of Georgia, and no one objected, even slightly protested, or hung up.”

    The report underscores the wide-ranging investigation that Willis undertook, noting that the panel heard from 75 witnesses, as well as investigators who helped them comb through voluminous documents related to the probe.

    Willis has also pursued evidence about Trump’s broader national effort to subvert the election, calling before the special grand jury top aides like his White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, former national security adviser Michael Flynn, attorney John Eastman and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.).

    Those issues are also the subject of an ongoing federal investigation based in Washington now being headed by special counsel Jack Smith. No charges have yet been brought in that probe.

    Under Georgia law, the special grand jury which was sworn in last May could subpoena witnesses and documents, but could not return indictments. Willis would have to seek such charges another, regular grand jury, but can present the evidence and testimony gathered by the special panel.

    Superior Court Judge Robert McBurney said in a ruling Monday that state law compelled him to publicly release the special grand jury’s findings, although he agreed to defer publishing portions of the report that discuss potential charges against individuals. The special grand jurors had urged the court to make their findings public.

    The special grand jury also seemed in its report to seek to assert some independence from Willis’ prosecutors. “That Office had nothing to do with the recommendations contained herein,” the report says, signed by the foreperson and deputy foreperson. The signatures and names of the jury’s leaders were redacted from the excerpts released Thursday.

    [ad_2]
    #Judge #releases #part #Georgia #grand #jury #report #alleged #election #tampering
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Grand Snow Festival held at Aharbal, Kulgam

    Grand Snow Festival held at Aharbal, Kulgam

    [ad_1]

    Festival aimed to promote Winter tourism, Winter sports; provide enhanced economic avenues to people: Dr Bilal

    KULGAM, FEBRUARY 16: In order to give fillip to the Winter tourism potential of Aharbal, promote tribal culture and to increase tourist footfall especially in winters, the District Administration Kulgam in collaboration with Aharbal Development Authority, RDD, YS&S, Tourism and Forest Division Kulgam today organised a daylong Winter Carnival, here.

    The Winter Carnival was today jointly inaugurated by Chairperson, District Development Council (DDC) Kulgam, M Afzal Parrey; Deputy Inspector General (DIG), South, Rayees Mohammad Bhat; Deputy Commissioner (DC) Kulgam, Dr.Bilal Mohi-Ud-din Bhat at Aharbal Tourist destination by flagging-off two groups of 60 trekkers to Chiranbal and Sangam.

    During the festival, multifarious activities and events were carried out which included Snow cricket, Snow run, Snow Rugby, Tug of war, Snow Volleyball, Skiing and other Snow games.

    Multiple stalls were installed by various departments including Agriculture, Horticulture, Tourism, Handicrafts, Fisheries, Employment, NRLM and other departments for showcasing government schemes and programmes.

    A stall housing articles and artifacts depicting local tradition and culture were also displayed which attracted immense public response.

    Scintillating cultural performances especially performances on tribal culture were also presented by local artists and school children which mesmerized the audience and guests present.

    Addressing the mammoth gathering, DDC Chairperson Mohd Afzal Parrey appreciated efforts of District Administration for organising the festivals to promote virgin lands in the district for larger public benefit.

    Stressing on tapping the potential of virgin destinations, the DIG South said that potential of this and other offbeat destinations needs to be harnessed optimally for better economic avenues.

    He also highlighted the role of the media for promotion of these destinations to attract tourists.

    Earlier, addressing the public DC Kulgam said that Aharbal and other tourism destinations in Kulgam have huge potential to attract tourists and the Winter Carnival is an initiative to promote winter tourism activities in unexplored scenic places, destinations of the district and to boost the tourism sector in Kulgam.

    The DC further added that organising Winter Festivals is also aimed at changing perception of people for winter tourism and to engage youth towards winter sports.

    Promotion of tourism is linked to enhanced employment generation and besides, engaging youth in sports activities will prevent them from falling into the trap of drug menace which has victimized youth badly, added Dr.Bilal.

    Later, a calendar of District Administration and a booklet prepared by Forest Division Kulgam titled ‘Nature is Calling’, containing information about various tourist destinations of the district was released.

    The picturesque area hosts breathtaking spots ranging from famous Waterfalls, to mesmerizing views of Gurwattan and Sangam and the Expansive meadows of Kungwattan, gushing waters of turbulent Vishaw besides the fascinating Upstream Alpine Lake, Kousarnag, which is a trekker’s Paradise, and Mahinag.

    They offer vast adventure tourism avenues, trekking, sight viewing, camping and are famous for picnicking and leisure activities.

    Besides general public, adventurists, participating sportspersons, students, the event was also attended by SSP Kulgam, Sahil Sarangal; ADC, Viqar Ahmad Giri; SDM Noorabad, Bashir Ul Hassan; ACR, Mir Imtiyaz besides local people and officers from Civil and Police administration.

    NO: PR/DDI/SGR/23/70044/

    [ad_2]
    #Grand #Snow #Festival #held #Aharbal #Kulgam

    ( With inputs from : roshankashmir.net )

  • Judge orders partial release of Georgia grand jury report on possible 2020 election crimes

    Judge orders partial release of Georgia grand jury report on possible 2020 election crimes

    [ad_1]

    georgia election investigation 67740

    Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis indicated last month that decisions on whether to charge any subjects of her investigation are “imminent.” Her year-long probe into whether Trump violated Georgia election law — in part by urging Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger to “find” enough votes to reverse the outcome — featured extensive efforts to compel testimony form some of Trump’s top White House and campaign advisers, as well as his outside lawyers.

    Dispite Willis’ preferences on timing, McBurney said he had to prioritize the public’s right to know about at least the general findings of the probe into alleged efforts to tamper with the 2020 election results.

    “While publication may not be convenient for the pacing of the district attorney’s investigation, the compelling public interest in these proceedings and the unquestionable value and importance of transparency require their release,” McBurney wrote in his eight-page order.

    A spokesperson for Willis did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the judge’s order and whether she will seek to appeal it.

    McBurney ruled that aspects of the report that recommend whether to indict — or not indict — specific individuals should remain private for now in part because those individuals are not afforded the same due process rights during the grand jury process they would have in court if they’re charged.

    While witnesses were permitted to have their lawyers nearby during the grand-jury proceedings, those lawyers were not permitted to sit in on the interviews to help mount a defense or rebut questions from prosecutors and grand jurors.

    Willis’ office got court approval for the special grand jury investigation last January and impaneled the actual jury in May.

    The probe stems in large part from a phone call Trump held with Raffensperger on Jan. 3, 2021, asking him to locate more than additional 11,000 votes for Trump so that he could be deemed the victor over Joe Biden in the state. Raffensperger and other state officials repeatedly told Trump they’d looked into allegations he’d made of fraud and hidden stashes ballots, but found nothing to support them.

    While the Georgia officials stood firm, a recording of the call indicates Trump continued to press, largely ignoring their explanations.

    But the probe significantly broadened over time to focus on Trump’s larger effort to subvert the 2020 election, in part by pushing allies in several states to deliver false sets of presidential electors to Washington. Among the witnesses Willis compelled to appear in Fulton County: Rudy Giuliani, Mike Flynn, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Mark Meadows, all of whom lost court battles to resist her summons.

    Many legal analysts have said the call could amount to an illegal attempt to tamper with the election results, although Trump has described the call as “perfect.” The special grand jury also explored efforts other Trump supporters made to urge recounts or decertification of the election results in the days before Congress met to tally the electoral votes on Jan. 6, 2021.

    Trump’s lawyers did not seek to intervene in the litigation over releasing the special grand jury’s report. The former president’s attorneys issued a statement last month saying they assumed the investigative body recommended no charges since it never subpoenaed him or sought a voluntary interview.

    Trump’s attorneys did not immediately respond to a request Monday for comment on the judge’s new order.

    Under Georgia law, special grand juries cannot return indictments, but their results can be used by prosecutors to take a case before a regular grand jury to seek criminal charges.

    [ad_2]
    #Judge #orders #partial #release #Georgia #grand #jury #report #election #crimes
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )